Computed tomography, positron emission tomography, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging for staging of limited pleural mesothelioma - Initial results

被引:56
|
作者
Plathow, Christian [1 ,2 ]
Staab, Adrian [5 ]
Schmaehl, Astrid [3 ]
Aschoff, Philip [1 ]
Zuna, Ivan [1 ]
Pfannenberg, Christina [1 ]
Peter, Schlemmer Heinz [1 ]
Eschmann, Susanne [2 ]
Klopp, Michael [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tubingen, Dept Diagnost Radiol, Tubingen, Germany
[2] Univ Tubingen, Dept Nucl Med, Tubingen, Germany
[3] Clin Thorac Dis, Dept Diagnost Radiol, Heidelberg, Germany
[4] Clin Thorac Dis, Dept Thorac Surg, Heidelberg, Germany
[5] Paul Scherrer Inst, Dept Radiotherapy, CH-8048 Zurich, Switzerland
关键词
positron emission tomography-CT; PET/CT; magnetic resonance imaging; mesothelioma; staging;
D O I
10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181817b3d
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate and compare the role of computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography (PET), PET/CT, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the correct staging of patients with limited malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Materials and Methods: Fifty-four patients with an epithelial MPM (34 men and 20 women) were included in this study. Patients were referred to our department for staging in a predicted resectable state (stage II/III). Within 3 days, PET/CT and MRI was performed in all patients. Images were evaluated by 3 specialists in the field of PET/CT and MRI. The subexaminations of PET/CT, PET, and CT were independently evaluated with respect to tumor stage. Subexaminations were compared with each other, with MRI and PET/CT. N-stage was verified by mediastinoscopy. Afterward, consensus reading was performed. In 52 patients, surgery served as gold standard. In 2 patients, follow-up control served as gold standard as an inoperable situation with distant metastases was found. Additionally, interobserver variability (K value) was calculated. Results: In stage II, accuracy was 0.77 (CT), 0.86 (PET), 0.8 (MRI), 1.0 (PET/CT), and in stage III 0.75, 0.83, 0.9, 1.0. PET/CT was significantly more accurate (P < 0.05) in stages II and III compared with all other techniques. CT and MRI were not able to detect distant metastases in 2 patients, which changed therapy (operable vs. inoperable). Interobserver variability was 0.7, 0.9, 0.8, 1.0 in stage II and 0.9, 0.9, 0.9, 1.0 in stage III. Conclusion: PET/CT makes it possible to stage patients with limited MPM with high accuracy and low interobserver variability.
引用
收藏
页码:737 / 744
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Visualization with positron emission tomography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography/computed tomography, and positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging
    Seemann, MD
    Gaa, J
    [J]. CIRCULATION, 2005, 112 (21) : E329 - E330
  • [2] Initial staging of lymphoma with positron emission tomography and computed tomography
    Hicks, RJ
    Mac Manus, MP
    Seymour, JF
    [J]. SEMINARS IN NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2005, 35 (03) : 165 - 175
  • [3] Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for the Pleural Staging of Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma: How Accurate Is It?
    Pinelli, Valentina
    Roca, Elisa
    Lucchini, Silvia
    Laroumagne, Sophie
    Loundou, Anderson
    Dutau, Herve
    Maldonado, Fabien
    Astoul, Philippe
    [J]. RESPIRATION, 2015, 89 (06) : 558 - 564
  • [4] Use of Computed Tomography and Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography for Staging of Local Extent in Patients With Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma
    Frauenfelder, Thomas
    Kestenholz, Peter
    Hunziker, Roger
    Thi Dan Linh Nguyen
    Fries, Martina
    Veit-Haibach, Patrick
    Husmann, Lars
    Stahel, Rolf
    Weder, Walter
    Opitz, Isabelle
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 2015, 39 (02) : 160 - 165
  • [5] Positron emission tomography with computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging for primary staging of prostate cancer
    Hasa, Ergela
    Langbein, Thomas
    Eiber, Matthias
    Knorr, Karina
    [J]. RADIOLOGE, 2021, 61 (09): : 818 - 824
  • [6] Discrepancies between positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in a cohort of oncological patients
    Oh, Geon
    O'Mahoney, Eoin
    Jeavons, Susanne
    Law, Phillip
    Ngai, Stanley
    McGill, George
    Yu, Chris
    Miles, Kenneth A.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING AND RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2020, 64 (02) : 204 - 210
  • [7] Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Local Tumor Staging in Patients With Primary Breast Cancer A Comparison With Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    Grueneisen, Johannes
    Nagarajah, James
    Buchbender, Christian
    Hoffmann, Oliver
    Schaarschmidt, Benedikt Michael
    Poeppel, Thorsten
    Forsting, Michael
    Quick, Harald H.
    Umutlu, Lale
    Kinner, Sonja
    [J]. INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2015, 50 (08) : 505 - 513
  • [8] Positron emission tomography/computed tomography
    Townsend, David W.
    [J]. SEMINARS IN NUCLEAR MEDICINE, 2008, 38 (03) : 152 - 166
  • [9] Imaging in laryngeal cancer: computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, positron emission tomography
    Zinreich, SJ
    [J]. OTOLARYNGOLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2002, 35 (05) : 971 - +
  • [10] The Role of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography in the Initial Staging of Colon Cancer
    Kim, Hyung Jin
    Oh, Seong Taek
    [J]. ANNALS OF COLOPROCTOLOGY, 2014, 30 (01) : 3 - 4